Kelly the Dog Posted July 16, 2005 Posted July 16, 2005 Pardon me if I missed something (I'm not going to read 7 pages of this). It seems, in this matter, Rove basically said "That's what I heard". How is that partisan? 382855[/snapback] I wasn't really talking about Rove. I was talking about all the reporters, pundits, partisan hacks being interviewed, and people here. We don't know what happened in the real story yet.
Gene Frenkle Posted July 16, 2005 Posted July 16, 2005 The irony setting on my multimeter doesn't go that high. I think it's fried now. 382770[/snapback] Do you really think that saying things like this makes your point?
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 16, 2005 Posted July 16, 2005 1. The only people frothing at the mouth because of this story were those who had a sincere dislike of Karl Rove long before any "revelations" came out. In other words, this story will end up having less effect in D.C. than the Nationals trading for Jose Guillen last winter. 382779[/snapback] bull sh--. Guillen's hitting .306 and leading the team in runs, home runs, and RBIs. And yet, you make it sound like that trade was almost as stupid as this Rove/Plame/Novak/Time/Newsweek garbage...
SilverNRed Posted July 16, 2005 Posted July 16, 2005 bull sh--. Guillen's hitting .306 and leading the team in runs, home runs, and RBIs. And yet, you make it sound like that trade was almost as stupid as this Rove/Plame/Novak/Time/Newsweek garbage... 382903[/snapback] No, Guillen is having a great year. What I'm saying is the Rove/Plame/Novak/Time/Newsweek nonsense will end up having less effect on D.C. politics than a baseball trade that worked out really well for the local team. Damn, I should've included the word "politics" in there to begin with...I'll fix it. (and now I have to get all this crap that you threw at me off... )
Terry Tate Posted July 16, 2005 Posted July 16, 2005 Do you really think that saying things like this makes your point? A lot quicker and easier than documenting the irony in announcing your disgust with regurgitating what has been lapped up from your party of choice, while you regurgitate what you've lapped up from your party of choice.
SilverNRed Posted July 16, 2005 Posted July 16, 2005 I'm exhausted at this point, but apparently I'm in charge of the Rove coverage around here so here's the latest: Rove email WASHINGTON (AP) - After mentioning a CIA operative to a reporter, Bush confidant Karl Rove alerted the president's No. 2 security adviser about the interview and said he tried to steer the journalist away from allegations the operative's husband was making about faulty Iraq intelligence. "Matt Cooper called to give me a heads-up that he's got a welfare reform story coming," Rove wrote in the e-mail to Hadley. "When he finished his brief heads-up he immediately launched into Niger. Isn't this damaging? Hasn't the president been hurt? I didn't take the bait, but I said if I were him I wouldn't get Time far out in front on this." So Rove's plan to smear Joe Wilson was to wait for reporters to call him on unrelated matters?
Gene Frenkle Posted July 16, 2005 Posted July 16, 2005 A lot quicker and easier than documenting the irony in announcing your disgust with regurgitating what has been lapped up from your party of choice, while you regurgitate what you've lapped up from your party of choice. 383049[/snapback] I'm not perfect, but at least I'll admit it. Why try when there are so many like-minded individuals here to do all the work for you?
Gene Frenkle Posted July 16, 2005 Posted July 16, 2005 I'm exhausted at this point, but apparently I'm in charge of the Rove coverage around here so here's the latest: Rove email So Rove's plan to smear Joe Wilson was to wait for reporters to call him on unrelated matters? 383070[/snapback] The plan of attack is to make this all about Joe Wilson because he's the one who broke the law.
Alaska Darin Posted July 17, 2005 Posted July 17, 2005 I'm not perfect, but at least I'll admit it. Why try when there are so many like-minded individuals here to do all the work for you? 383439[/snapback] Such a victim.
Terry Tate Posted July 17, 2005 Posted July 17, 2005 I'm exhausted at this point, but apparently I'm in charge of the Rove coverage around here ... And a fine job you're doing too, son. Get to work on that Grand Jury leak, because there's still enough questions for this to go either way, or nowhere.
Gene Frenkle Posted July 17, 2005 Posted July 17, 2005 Such a victim. 383452[/snapback] Thanks for the pop psychologist analysis, but I'm pretty sure I wasn't talking to you and could do without your one liners. That said, I'm sure this will bring on more, as it's clear you love those one liners. It's nice to know that you care, however, and that you are so ready to come to the aid of your internet buddies.
Alaska Darin Posted July 17, 2005 Posted July 17, 2005 Thanks for the pop psychologist analysis, but I'm pretty sure I wasn't talking to you and could do without your one liners. That said, I'm sure this will bring on more, as it's clear you love those one liners. Still having a difficult time with the concept of the public message board, huh? Maybe someday. It's nice to know that you care, however, and that you are so ready to come to the aid of your internet buddies. 383474[/snapback] I wasn't coming to the aid of anyone. I just like to use the mallot in the "whack a whiner" game. It's fun.
SilverNRed Posted July 17, 2005 Posted July 17, 2005 It's nice to know that you care, however, and that you are so ready to come to the aid of your internet buddies. 383474[/snapback] Which one of us "internet buddies" was in such great peril that we needed Darin to rescue us?
SilverNRed Posted July 18, 2005 Posted July 18, 2005 Another op-ed by someone with a clue. Mark Stein As her weirdly self-obsesssed husband Joseph C. Wilson IV conceded on CNN the other day, she wasn't a ''clandestine officer'' and, indeed, hadn't been one for six years. So one can only ''leak'' her name in the sense that one can ''leak'' the name of the checkout clerk at Home Depot. Back when Woodrow Wilson was running for president, he had a campaign song called ''Wilson, That's All.'' If only. With Joe Wilson, it's never all. He keeps coming back like a song. But in the real world there's only one scandal in this whole wretched business -- that the CIA, as part of its institutional obstruction of the administration, set up a pathetic ''fact-finding mission'' that would be considered a joke by any serious intelligence agency and compounded it by sending, at the behest of his wife, a shrill politically motivated poseur who, for the sake of 15 minutes' celebrity on the cable gabfest circuit, misled the nation about what he found. This controversy began, you'll recall, because Wilson objected to a line in the president's State of the Union speech that British intelligence had discovered that Iraq had been trying to acquire ''yellowcake'' -- i.e., weaponized uranium -- from Africa. This assertion made Bush, in Wilson's incisive analysis, a ''liar'' and Cheney a ''lying sonofabitch.'' In fact, the only lying sonafabitch turned out to be Yellowcake Joe. Just about everybody on the face of the earth except Wilson, the White House press corps and the moveon.org crowd accepts that Saddam was indeed trying to acquire uranium from Africa. Don't take my word for it; it's the conclusion of the Senate intelligence report, Lord Butler's report in the United Kingdom, MI6, French intelligence, other European services -- and, come to that, the original CIA report based on Joe Wilson's own briefing to them. Why Yellowcake Joe then wrote an article for the New York Times misrepresenting what he'd been told by senior figures from Major Wanke's regime in Niger is known only to him. The British suicide bombers and the Iranian nuke demands are genuine crises. The Valerie Plame game is a pseudo-crisis. If you want to talk about Niger or CIA reform, fine. But if you seriously think the only important aspect of a politically motivated narcissist kook's drive-thru intelligence mission to a critical part of the world is the precise sequence of events by which some White House guy came to mention the kook's wife to some reporter, then you've departed the real world and you're frolicking on the wilder shores of Planet Zongo.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 18, 2005 Posted July 18, 2005 Another op-ed by someone with a clue. Mark Stein 383874[/snapback] That was fabulous. Did you hear the latest? Now someone from Time says that someone on Cheney's staff told him Plame's name and not Rove, except that Rove told him too and WAS the source... I've got a feeling this is going to get a LOT more absurd before it dies...the ONLY person I respect in this is Judith Miller, for sticking to her principles.
EC-Bills Posted July 18, 2005 Posted July 18, 2005 Who's Karl?!? Ding! Pepporoni HotPockets® gotta go.
Ghost of BiB Posted July 18, 2005 Posted July 18, 2005 That was fabulous. Did you hear the latest? Now someone from Time says that someone on Cheney's staff told him Plame's name and not Rove, except that Rove told him too and WAS the source... I've got a feeling this is going to get a LOT more absurd before it dies...the ONLY person I respect in this is Judith Miller, for sticking to her principles. 383915[/snapback] That was probably one of the best op-ed's I've seen in a while, but my ears are still going to be ringing with Flightsuit-Halliburton.
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted July 18, 2005 Posted July 18, 2005 That was probably one of the best op-ed's I've seen in a while, but my ears are still going to be ringing with Flightsuit-Halliburton. 383958[/snapback] ...despite the obvious fact that the themes discussed in the op-ed are just as applicable to the Lewinski "crisis" as they are to the Plame "crisis". But I'm sure we'll see through the magic of Frenklevision that this meaningless sh-- is important only when Republicans are involved...
RI Bills Fan Posted July 18, 2005 Posted July 18, 2005 ...despite the obvious fact that the themes discussed in the op-ed are just as applicable to the Lewinski "crisis" as they are to the Plame "crisis". But I'm sure we'll see through the magic of Frenklevision that this meaningless sh-- is important only when Republicans are involved... 384065[/snapback] <Catches latest load of crap and examines it carefully> Translation: Dispicable Liberal Smearmeister (Gene Frenkle) will be endlessly vilified if he or she (Ya never know folks) attempts to use the same tactics that the Honorable Conservative Commentator (Ghost of BiB) just used. <Drops crap in plastic container> Yep, Same Old Sh*t Note: I'll be at sea for the next week or so, feel free to flame away till I get back.
Ghost of BiB Posted July 18, 2005 Posted July 18, 2005 <Catches latest load of crap and examines it carefully> Translation: Dispicable Liberal Smearmeister (Gene Frenkle) will be endlessly vilified if he or she (Ya never know folks) attempts to use the same tactics that the Honorable Conservative Commentator (Ghost of BiB) just used. <Drops crap in plastic container> Yep, Same Old Sh*t Note: I'll be at sea for the next week or so, feel free to flame away till I get back. 384108[/snapback] That's "Mr. Honorable Conservative Commentator". Hey, the guy agrees with everything I've been saying all along. Why shouldn't I think it's a good piece?
Recommended Posts